Regarding "Conserve water" (Page B8, Wednesday), clearly, we in Houston and the rest of the state of Texas should be giving serious thought to the conservation of water. And the examples you cite in the editorial of successful projects to reduce water usage are encouraging.

Conservation of any resource as valuable as water is certainly an admirable goal. Conservation by itself, however, would have come up glaringly insufficient if prudent leaders in Houston's past had not had the foresight or vision to have built the reservoirs that now provide the bulk of the water used in the Greater Houston area.

If the leaders in Houston's past had allowed themselves to be deterred from building Lake Houston, Lake Livingston and Lake Conroe by the snail darter crowd, we would not have been able to grow into the fourth-largest city in the country.

Conservation alone would not have done it. And the inexplicable reluctance to create additional reservoirs is singly the most important impediment to this area having an adequate water supply.

The humans in Houston and throughout remainder of Texas are in trouble. But the snail darters and yellow-throated warblers are doing just fine.

Ronnie T. Martin, Friendswood

Confederate priorities

Regarding "Dowling trade-offs" (Page B8, Wednesday), before one excessively romanticizes Confederate Dick Dowling for the exculpating factor of sparing Texas cities from occupation, there are a couple of cold, hard facts that need to be considered. Texas was never a priority for Yankee invasion; otherwise, they would have sent someone like Sherman to lead the Red River campaign instead of a political general like Nathaniel Banks.

As to the idea that the hardship of Yankee occupation would have fallen much harder on blacks than whites, there are a lot of blacks from New Orleans who would dispute that. Except for the Confederates blowing up a fort before they left, Brownsville suffered few ill effects from Yankee occupation.

But I have fewer problems with naming a street after Dowling than when and where it was done. It was done on the edge of Emancipation Park in the middle of a black neighborhood - in 1892, a time when African Americans were being excluded from the political process in Texas, sometimes by domestic terrorism. It was deliberately offensive at the time, and still is to me.

However, if someone in River Oaks wants to adopt the name for their street, more power to them.

Walter D. Kamphoefner, Bryan

Lead-foot rep

Regarding "Coleman's traffic stop video released," (Page A1, Thursday), the article avoided a most obvious question: Why wasn't Rep. Garnet Coleman issued a citation for going 94 mph? He was given a simple warning with no consequences because he had a license plate showing that he was a state official. 94 mph is an egregious violation that endangered him and all other motorists.

An apology is due, as the police unions are demanding from Coleman "Police organizations want apology from Coleman" (Page B1, Friday). And another apology is also due from police for not sanctioning one of their own for not citing Coleman for his irresponsible and very dangerous violation of Texas law.

Robert Gabler, Kingwood

The real crime

Regarding "Peterson decision doesn't sit well" (Page A1, Friday), like other kids of my generation, I collected a few black and blue marks, which Peterson's detractors would doubtless have considered child abuse. To my parents, it was a normal part of child rearing. I think this was the mindset of Adrian Peterson. In my opinion, his punishment far exceeded the "crime."

To my way of thinking, Peterson is guilty of a much greater and more serious wrong. He has fathered several children by various women. I understand he does pay child support, but this falls far short of the moral obligation to provide a child a loving family upbringing. It is a sad commentary on the NFL, the media, and society as a whole, that eyes remain closed and this tragic irresponsibility is condoned. When compared to the punishment administered to his son, it is by far the greater offense.